sound card vs DAC vs amp

silk186

silk186

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 26, 2008
Messages
1,628
I'm really curious about sound and value, I won't get anything now but I will in the future.
I see basically three recommendations on this forum.
  1. sound card -> PC speakers & headphones
  2. onboard -> DAC -> headphone
  3. onboard -(optical out)- t-amp / AMP -> bookshelf speakers

I haven't had a sound card since my P4, which I ran though an old Sony amp to tower speakers.

Except for space, what are better about these options than a receiver that is likely to be able to connect to a computer or any other audio device for the next 20+ years.
 
The thing to understand is that a DAC is just a Digital to Analog converter. You're always going to be using a DAC no matter what, whether you are using the DAC in your soundcard (or onboard), whether you are feeding digital into an external DAC, or whether you are feeding digital into a receiver (which has an Internal DAC).

You sometimes hear generalizations like people saying an external DAC is always better than a soundcard, but really just because the DAC is located in one place or another doesn't automatically mean it's better or worse. The DAC built into my X-Fi Titanium HD soundcard is better than many of the external DACs on the market. External DACs have the advantage of potentially avoiding electrical noise/interference that a soundcard inside a computer would encounter.

So to be able to say whether a soundcard, an external DAC, or a receiver would be a better bet, it's really going to come down to comparing the individual specifications of the units in question as well as which configuration better suits your overall needs.

Another important thing that you need to understand is the difference between an analog Line-Output and an amplified analog output. An amplified output is meant to be able to power headphones or unpowered computer speakers directly. A Line-output is meant to simply feed into the input of another component, such as a separate headphone amp, etc. The key being, if you tried to use a line-output to power headphones directly you would find that it simply doesn't have enough power to do so. If you tried to use an amplified output and fed that output back into another component, it would probably sound like crap due to mismatched levels, being amplified twice, etc.
 
The most cost effective and good sounding solution is a sound card.

With the new drivers, the Titanium HD is probably the budget king for music and games. I still think the Creative Z series is better for directional sound in games but not as good for music.

Now you may need an external amp depending on what else you are using in terms of speakers and headphones.
 
Meeho said:
That is comparing apples to oranges to bananas.
Click to expand...

It may be to audiophiles, but to most people it is apples to apples. I only care about the end results: how does it sound and how much does it cost. I have read many many post talking about each of the about paths, but not a good comparison. Just you can do A, B, or C.

So, the budget recommend for good sound might be a sound card to Logitech speakers? if I'm running sound card or integrated to receiver how to I make sure it is not an "amplified analog output"

I understand the internal and external DAC is not necessarily different in quality.

What is the best way to power a set of bookshelf speaker? It seems the most PC speakers don't get good reviews.
 
Last edited:
silk186 said:
It may be to audiophiles, but to most people it is apples to apples. I only care about the end results: how does it sound and how much does it cost. I have read many many post talking about each of the about paths, but not a good comparison. Just you can do A, B, or C.
Click to expand...

Pose your question this way:

Engine vs. transmission vs. brakes

or

CPU vs. GPU. vs HDD

Now do you see the problem? To have a car you need all 3 in some form. To have a computer you need all 3 in some form.
 
Unless you're willing to invest some serious cash into a dac, quality amp and quality speakers, I would stick to your sound card.

Personally I got tired of the crap quality of these computer speaker systems from Logitech , klipsch and everything else out there aimed at PC.

I picked up A Denon 1612 for less than $200 on a refurb deal. Added a 12" powered sub for $200 And used my paradigm studio 10s mounted on stands. If you had to buy everything at once, you're easily looking at $1400-2500 of an investment for my setup. However, the sound quality is nothing short of amazing.

My 1612 is fed via spdif via a soundblaster ZxR. I've compared the 1612 dac to the soundblasters and I can't hear any difference. Dacs should be completely transparent and have zero coloring.

Having multi channel PC audio for over 10 yrs, I've come to appreciate a clean and powerful 2.1 system over these crap 5.1 setups that are overpriced.
 
put this this way your audio system is only as good as the weakest link.

if you are a true audiophile you will need to research the DAC chips, boards, speakers, wires etc.

i dont even believe the so called high end sound cards even utilise the best DAC chips. as pcs produce a lot of interference - audiophiles would tend to use external DACs
 
silk186 said:
So, the budget recommend for good sound might be a sound card to Logitech speakers? if I'm running sound card or integrated to receiver how to I make sure it is not an "amplified analog output"
Click to expand...

You'd probably want to avoid computer speakers. If you're going to hook up to a receiver, then you don't want to be using the analog output of your soundcard/onboard at all. If you are using a reciever, you want to run a digital (coax or optical) from your soundcard/onboard to your receiver.

You want to make sure the audio only get processed through a DAC once. By sending the digital signal into your receiver, your receiver uses it's DAC. If you sent an analog signal into your receiver, your soundcard would have already processed it through it's DAC. Most modern receivers do all their processing digitally since they mostly get fed digital signals anyway, which means it would then take that analog signal, convert it back into digital, and then ultimately convert it back into analog using the receiver's DAC. That means it would have undergone 3 conversions (D->A, A->D, D->A) and that is something you don't want to happen.
 
The best sound system Ive had in a while is these Klipsch ProMedia 2.1 speakers. They sound very good themselves and are the best you can get without going to dedicated desktop speakers and receiver. But the best thing is that they have a very good headphone amp and thats what I use. The key thing you want to get good SQ is good power. The onboard DAC is perfectly capable of spitting out a ruler flat, reference level signal (goes to get flame suit for impending attack by the golden ears) to an amp and a big beefy one like what is in the ProMedias or any dedicated headphone amp will give you excellent sound quality.

Its also about the cheapest option. The Klipsch set runs around $150 at Best Buy and for that you get a very good 2.1 speaker system and also an excellent headphone amp (youll have to use cans with a 3.5mm jack instead of USB though).
 
MacLeod said:
The onboard DAC is perfectly capable of spitting out a ruler flat, reference level signal
Click to expand...

What "onboard DAC" are you referring to? Or are you just lumping all the different motherboard audio solutions into a singular category and pretending like there is no difference?
 
silk186 said:
It may be to audiophiles, but to most people it is apples to apples. I only care about the end results: how does it sound and how much does it cost. I have read many many post talking about each of the about paths, but not a good comparison. Just you can do A, B, or C.
Click to expand...

No, your question just doesn't make sense. It's like asking what is faster, a motorcycle or a car. Well, which make and model of each? What do you want? Do you want speakers or headphones? You can have good sounding amp+bookshelf speakers combo, but there could be even better quality sound card + headphones combos.

In any case, the speakers and the room (not for headphones, of course) have by far the strongest influence on sound. Other than that, the amp (be it a sound card or external one) just has to not suck ($30 vs $3000 won't mean anything if they both do their jobs properly), and you're set.

In general, you'll probably get the best bang for buck from a good second hand receiver and speakers. If it's speakers you wan't, of course.
 
Last edited:
GotNoRice said:
What "onboard DAC" are you referring to? Or are you just lumping all the different motherboard audio solutions into a singular category and pretending like there is no difference?
Click to expand...

Yep there is no difference between the passive analog signal coming out of the back of your PC and the passive analog signal coming out of a high dollar sound card, at least not one that's audible. It doesn't take a fancy, expensive sound card to produce a transparent and flat signal. The onboard audio that comes on your motherboard is perfectly capable of doing it and that's all you need that signal to be. Spend your money where it matters which is speakers and amps.
 
Last edited:
MacLeod said:
Yep there is no difference between the passive analog signal coming out of the back of your PC and the passive analog signal coming out of a high dollar sound card, at least not one that's audible.
Click to expand...

Realtek ftw amirite? :rolleyes:
 
GotNoRice said:
Realtek ftw amirite? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Yes! That Realtek audio can easily produce a flat, transparent signal to your amp. Thats all you need! Some fancy $150 sound card cant make it any flatter or transparent'er can it? Once its flat, transparent and clean, its flat, transparent and clean. Once you get to 0% distortion, you cant go -1%. I know it flies in the face of all the marketing you read but thats because they cant sell you fancy sound cards without those claims. Its no different then all the snake oil companies like Signal Cable tries to push off on people with their magic extension cords and cable risers. Its stuff that makes no difference at all but people line up to spend $80 for a magic power cord or $40 for some upside down shot glasses to keep their RCA's off the floor so your vibrations from the floor wont seep into your audio signal and cause distortion. Speakers are the most important part and where you should spend the most amount of money. Your amp is next.

I know this is futile as this is like arguing religion but I always keep trying. Speakers > amp > source. Not saying the source isnt important, just that the DAC on your Sony Walkman is capable of delivering a pristine signal to an amp so dont worry about spending money on a big, fancy, expensive source unless youve got cash to spare and dont have to cut into your speaker and amp budget.
 
Nope. There is a distinct difference in the sound bw realtek and a creative z.

Play a game like bf4 sometime and if you still tell me they are the same....I will congradulate you on being tone deaf.
 
spaceman said:
Nope. There is a distinct difference in the sound bw realtek and a creative z.

Play a game like bf4 sometime and if you still tell me they are the same....I will congradulate you on being tone deaf.
Click to expand...

And I will "congradulate" you on not knowing how to spell.

If youre talking about using headphones running off the onboard vs sound card then youre totally right. The headphone amp on the onboard is very weak and will sound like shit where the headphone amp on the sound card is pretty solid. Im not talking about that. Im talking about when youre using an external amp and speakers. When using this configuration, youre using the passive signal coming from the PC. This signal has no power and just needs to be flat and uncolored. The Realtek onboard audio is more than enough to do that.

And since an external amp either a receiver or something like a Klipsch 2.1 system will have a better and more powerful headphone amp so you would get better sound quality and performance this way over that of a sound card because its headphone amp, while better than the stock onboard, is still going to be limited by size and wont be as powerful as an external headphone amp.

So yeah, if you dont want to invest or deal with an external amp and speakers and all that and just want good sound quality thru your headphones then a good sound card is imperative because you need as good an amp as possible. But if you want to go the route of amp and speakers, you can skip the sound card and have much better performance both in your speakers and your headphones.
 
MacLeod said:
Once you get to 0% distortion, you cant go -1%.
Click to expand...

Ok, link even one single onboard audio solution or soundcard that has "0% distortion". :rolleyes:

MacLeod said:
Once its flat, transparent and clean, its flat, transparent and clean.
Click to expand...

Except that the sound out of a junk onboard solution isn't going to be flat, transparent, or "clean". It doesn't surprise me that you can't tell the difference, considering that you referred to your computer speakers as "The best sound system Ive had in a while". Its quite telling that all of your posts are so defensive, talking about getting flamed, etc before anyone even responded to you; usually happens when people say something stupid that they pretty much already know is wrong.
 
Last edited:
GotNoRice said:
Ok, link even one single onboard audio solution or soundcard that has "0% distortion". :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

That was just an example. Every audio component has some level of distortion but anything below 1% is inauible.

Except that the sound out of a junk onboard solution isn't going to be flat, transparent, or "clean".
Click to expand...

Yes it will be. For one its not going to be "sound". Its going to be a passive, low voltage signal thats sent out to the amplifier. Once the amp gets it and amplified it, then itll be sound. So all youre needing it to do is convert the digital signal to an analog signal without coloring it at all. The onboard audio doesnt need to amplify it or do anything else to it. It just needs to be flat from 20-20KHz and it doesnt take a high end DAC to do that.

Again, Im NOT talking about powering your headphones thru the onboard vs a sound card. Im ONLY talking about the using the passive, low voltage signal coming out to your amp and then playing your headphones thru your external amp.

It doesn't surprise me that you can't tell the difference, considering that you referred to your computer speakers as "The best sound system Ive had in a while".
Click to expand...

My background is in car audio (SQ not the SPL) where Ive been an active SQ competitor for about a decade. My current system consists of a $1200 head unit/processor and about $1000 in Scanspeak drivers. Car audio gives you a great understanding of sound quality because unlike home audio where you basically plug and play, car audio takes a lot of work and tuning and working with placement, axis aiming, time alignment, crossover setting, phase adjustments and tuning using a 1/3 octave EQ per driver and painstakingly listening to differences as subtle as 2 db. And yeah, my head unit, a Pioneer P99, has THREE 24 bit DAC's. :D

When youre trying everything under the sun to make improvements, you find out real quick what works and what doesnt. Then you take it to shows and get judges to validate if you actually did make any difference so you know for sure what works and what doesnt. Thats why there isnt a market for the snake oil in car audio. You buy $500 worth of magic sound carpet or something like that and take it to a show and score no different than before, well it wouldnt take long for word to get around on what is hype and what isnt. ;)
 
MacLeod said:
unlike home audio where you basically plug and play, car audio takes a lot of work and tuning and working with placement, axis aiming, time alignment, crossover setting, phase adjustments and tuning using a 1/3 octave EQ per driver and painstakingly listening to differences as subtle as 2 db.
Click to expand...

You don't think things such as placement, etc matter just as much in a home environment?

When youre trying everything under the sun to make improvements, you find out real quick what works and what doesnt. Then you take it to shows and get judges to validate if you actually did make any difference so you know for sure what works and what doesnt. Thats why there isnt a market for the snake oil in car audio. You buy $500 worth of magic sound carpet or something like that and take it to a show and score no different than before, well it wouldnt take long for word to get around on what is hype and what isnt. ;)
Click to expand...

The difference between a cheap onboard DAC and a quality DAC is hardly "snake oil", but you clearly have a lot of bitterness built up when it comes to home audio, mostly regarding things that are beyond the scope of this thread.
 
MacLeod get a friend with hearing and see if they agree with your opinion. I call bullshit. I say spend the $60 for a shielded soundcard over onboard. No snake oil there. I find onboard to be lifeless and dull. Less detailed and just plain difficult to enjoy. Oh and congrats on your comment. My phone spellcheck failed and I wasn't observant first thing in the morning sorry.

So op start with a solid base. A good soundcard is an important building block to any PC audio chain.
 
GotNoRice said:
You don't think things such as placement, etc matter just as much in a home environment?
Click to expand...

Not as much in as in a car. In the home you don't have such confined spaces chock full of hard reflective plastic and glass and you're not sitting so far off center as you are in a car not to mention how limited you are on space so you can't just put any size speaker just anywhere. That's where all the fun is, trying to solve all those riddles. There have been plenty that have. I wish you guys could hear some of these systems like Steve Cook's Avalanche or Matt Roberts' Silverado or Kirk Proffitt' Acura. Sit in there and listen to Diana Krall and close your eyes and you'll have a hard believing you're sitting in a car. ;)
 
So by your onboard vs sound card theory any head unit works the same in car audio? No need for a Kenwood when a Kraco will sound exactly the same?

You're confusing me. PC audio to you is just whatever. With car audio you go right to the top end?
 
Last edited:
spaceman said:
So by your onboard vs sound card theory any head unit works the same in car audio? No need for a Kenwood when a Kraco will sound exactly the same?
Click to expand...

Unfortunately its not that simple. Higher end head units will have way way more and better features, have a stronger output stage (5+ volts vs 1), look a whole lot better and be way better built and last longer. I spent my income tax refund on my Pioneer P99 because its a work of art, has an 8 channel, 4 way variable crossover with slopes from 6 to 36 db/oct, 8 channel time alignment and L and R 31 band EQ. So youre buying your head unit for a lot of different things. However with more new cars having their head units integrated into the dash, there are a lot of competitors out there competing, and winning, with the factory head unit running thru a processor.

I think you just enjoy car audio more than home. Long commute?
Click to expand...

I enjoy the competition, its just a lot of fun. Designing, building and especially the tuning is what I love. Then drive to Nashville, Atlanta, Daytona and places like that and hang out with a bunch of like minded audio geeks is a lot of fun too. Takes a shit load of money though so now that Ive got a kid and house and all that I dont hit as many shows as Id like or run the type of gear Id like but Ill be doing it as long as its around.

You're confusing me. PC audio to you is just whatever. With car audio you go right to the top end?
Click to expand...

Yes. Im way more into car audio competition than I am PC [H]ard. This is mainly a pastime for me playing games and stuff but I really get into the car audio thing and take it a lot more seriously. Ive never won a world championship. Been 2nd at finals 4 years in a row and have won 4 state championships but can never get the top spot and coming so close and losing really motivates ya. So yeah, I pour as much cash and resources as I can into it without taking from the family budget of course.
 
Last edited:
Venomous said:
Unless you're willing to invest some serious cash into a dac, quality amp and quality speakers, I would stick to your sound card.

Personally I got tired of the crap quality of these computer speaker systems from Logitech , klipsch and everything else out there aimed at PC.

I picked up A Denon 1612 for less than $200 on a refurb deal. Added a 12" powered sub for $200 And used my paradigm studio 10s mounted on stands. If you had to buy everything at once, you're easily looking at $1400-2500 of an investment for my setup. However, the sound quality is nothing short of amazing.

My 1612 is fed via spdif via a soundblaster ZxR. I've compared the 1612 dac to the soundblasters and I can't hear any difference. Dacs should be completely transparent and have zero coloring.

Having multi channel PC audio for over 10 yrs, I've come to appreciate a clean and powerful 2.1 system over these crap 5.1 setups that are overpriced.
Click to expand...

+1

I used various Logitechs for years -- their beefiest and "best" -- thinking I had upgraded my sound up as far as I could go. And then one day, I got a little whisper of recommendation from an [H] thread about ditching the PC-sound and going for some receiver/bookshelf madness.

The day I outputted HDMI sound into a new Yamaha receiver, feeding a 12in dedicated sub + some bookshelfs -- I almost cried, it was so beautiful.

Easily the most mindblowing upgrade I've ever done. Sound so crystal clear and beautiful, I'd often have to get up to check around the house, thinking I was hearing things that were real (especially door knocks, lol).

I'd shed my SSD before I shed these non-PC sound gig.
 
Check out sound cards that have headphone amps built in. The soundblaster z is nice with the amp my headphones are louder than most low end speakers. I don't use my 5.1 speakers that often but they are hooked up to the card as well but they are low end logitechs with a sub.
 
MacLeod is maybe taking things a bit too extreme, but I'll agree with him that for the most part, you're getting far more bang for your buck spending money on speakers than you are on a DAC. I'd spring the couple bucks for something better than onboard myself, but I wouldn't spend as much on my source as I would on my speakers. I've been to a number of audiophile meets and events and I would have a hard time trying to tell the difference between a $200 DAC and a $2,000 DAC but I can sure tell the difference between $200 speakers and $2,000 speakers.

If I had, say, a $500 budget for PC audio, I wouldn't buy a $150 DAC, a $150 amp, and $150 speakers. I'd buy a $75 DAC, a $125 amp (used is good), and $300 speakers. Amps are - cheap, powerful, good sounding - pick any two. For near field 2.0 PC listening, you don't need a whole lot of power, so you don't have to spend a fortune. Good quality T-amp or a good vintage stereo receiver and you are good.
 
GotNoRice said:
The difference between a cheap onboard DAC and a quality DAC is hardly "snake oil", but you clearly have a lot of bitterness built up when it comes to home audio, mostly regarding things that are beyond the scope of this thread.
Click to expand...

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/high-end-pc-audio,3733.html

I sank $2000 of my own money into the DAC2 HGC last December, so I subjectively wanted it to sound better than everything else. Tests have shown that it doesn't. I was surprised, but, having been personally involved in the evaluation and believing in the integrity of what we set up, I rationally accept the findings.

Of course, we're ready for the audiophile community to rise up in arms about the statement you'll read next, but it's true that neither an intermediate enthusiast nor a serious one with ~$70,000 in gear at home were able to reliably tell apart any of the four devices once we properly set up a blind test with accurate volume-matching. We actually enjoyed them all as great audio experiences.

Using world-class headphones, a $2 Realtek integrated audio codec could not be reliably distinguished from the $2000 Benchmark DAC2 HGC in a four-device round-up. Again, all four devices sounded great. The same might not apply to full-sized speakers; we can't say, since we didn't test them. But as far as some of the best headphones in the world go, we stand by these test results.
Click to expand...

Of course, most motherboards have poor Realtek implementation with lots of interference and hiss, but the rest stands.
 
Last edited:
Meeho said:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/high-end-pc-audio,3733.html
Click to expand...

I'm not sure why you're posting this here when there is an entire thread already about this article, which I've already replied to. The post of mine that you quoted specifically referenced "cheap" dacs because unlike others I don't lump all onboard audio into some simplistic singular category and pretend like all onboard is the same, because it's not.. And if you want to contend that the ALC889 is "cheap" just because the article deceptivly focuses on nothing more than the bulk cost of the chip while giving retail prices for everything else, consider that MOST motherboards come with an ALC892 instead of an ALC889. Why? Because the ALC892 is cheaper... If the ALC889 was cheap in any context that actually mattered, then you'd think motherboard manufacturers would jump at the chance to use a chip with such better specs.

Meeho said:
Of course, most motherboards have poor Realtek implementation with lots of interference and hiss
Click to expand...

Which is probably why most people still hear a difference when upgrading from their onboard. No one in this thread is really contending that it's impossible to have a quality onboard sound implementation - it's just not common.
 
Many people attribute good bass with the best sound quality.
This of course helps and can enhance some detail a little (or obscure it if set up badly), but it isnt what quality DACs are about.
They are about retrieving more detail that you otherwise would not notice.

To make best use of a decent DAC, good quality wiring with minimal connections, a detailed amp with good power supply and revealing speakers should be used.
Speaker placement can help a lot too.
 
I apologize for hijacking but I didn't really see it necessary to start a new thread.

I have a Soundblaster Z and the Klipsch ProMedia 2.1 plugged into the line-out of the soundcard and my headphones in the headphone jack of the soundcard. Does the weaker amp on the soundcard limit my speakers? Also, Would I benefit from plugging my headphones into the speakers instead of directly into the card?

I'll admit I didn't thoroughly research before I made my purchaes but I found good deals on both and figured they would be a good combo. It is a massive upgrade from my onboard sound though. It really packs a wallop. I keep the speaker volume just under max and my windows volume at 1-15 and 15 is pretty damn loud.
 
Ideally plug the headphones directly into the card but there are circumstances that can make them not sound so good.
Try it and see which you prefer.

Your Klipsch speakers have their own amp, you are not relying on the power output of the soundcard.
 
Do not trust anything said by the audiophile community that is not backed up by rational data and double blind tests. You'll end up buying multi-hundred dollar silver interconnects and isolation pads for your own face.

Stuff like jitter, THD, etc. is measurable BUT you should be paying attention to when and where it's audible. Most decent modern equipment is not going to introduce irregularities to an amplified recording. The preamp signal path, DAC (to a smaller extent), source, room, and speakers are really the only things to worry about. A modern solid state amp will reproduce the sound without any discernibly audible coloration if it is not changing the frequency response and not clipping.

Throwing thousands of dollars at a 20 watt tube amp is a big waste of money if you're not buying it for aesthetics for instance.

Car audio is even worse. The people with mcintosh amps and super high end old school source players like those copper denon decks in cars are feeding into the psychoacoustics of $$ and aesthetic = sound quality.

This is why audio magazines don't often review things with measurements and instead talk about crap like pace, rhythm, and timing. They can't sell you on differences that don't exist, and they certainly won't double blind things like amps in a fair test.
 
Your speakers have their own internal amplification and are just fine using (and in fact expected to use) the line out of your sound card.

Secondly, the Sound Blaster Z has an amplified headphone output, so I would stick with using that.
 
I will say this. I was using onboard and went to a SB-Z. Night and day difference, not even close. Just do that, you'll be fine.
 
you also cannot believe what data tells you, as everyone's ears are different. What sounds good to me may not sound good to you. its all about experience and how one perceives the playback quality. Data only paint a small picture, experience counts for far more.
 
Last edited:
genkifd said:
you also cannot believe what data tells you also as everyones ears a different. What sounds good to me may not sound good to you. its all about experience and hoe real does the playback sound to you. Data only paint a small picture, experience counts for far more.
Click to expand...

Such words. So true. Much grammar. Wow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top